Apple introduced the iPhone 5, as well as a colorful major upgrade to the iPod touch, during a special media event on Wednesday. The new hardware boasts notable upgrades for both devices with respect to the built-in camera hardware. The iPhone 5 has a refined version of the 8MP camera in the iPhone 4S, while the iPod touch gets a serious shot in the photographic arm with a 5MP autofocus camera. Both devices also get a backside-illuminated, 1.2MP, 720p FaceTime HD front-facing camera and a new automatic panorama shooting feature in the Camera app.

We thought it might be helpful to break down all the updates in more detail for the avid shutterbugs in our audience.

iPhone 5: 8 megapixels refined

The iPhone 4S had very respectable camera hardware. The front-facing camera was the same old VGA-quality FaceTime camera we knew from previous iOS devices, but the rear-facing 8MP "iSight" camera was one of the best on any smartphone we've ever tested. Apple not only increased the resolution over the iPhone 4's 5MP, but it did so while improving sensitivity to light by employing a backside-illuminated, full-well CMOS design. It coupled the sensor with a noise-reducing hybrid IR filter and a new five-element, f/2.4 autofocus lens.

The iPhone 5's camera is still 8MP, but it is further refined. The new sensor and lens combination is thinner, to fit within the thinner iPhone 5 casing, and the focal length is ever so slightly wider (4.13mm versus 4.28mm). Otherwise the hardware specs are nearly identical: 3264x2448 pixel resolution, backside illumination, hybrid IR filter, five-element f/2.4 lens.

Specifically, Apple claims to now be using micron-level alignment for the lens, which should help improve critical sharpness. (Such precision is likely also required to fit the camera module into the thinner iPhone 5 body.) The lens is protected by a sapphire crystal cover for improved protection, which should also carry less potential aberrations compared to the glass cover used on the iPhone 4S.

These are minor refinements, however; most of the improved capabilities are due to the better processing capabilities of the A6 processor and improved software. The dual-core A6 processor—likely built on a 32nm process and employing A15 ARM cores and updated PowerVR GPUs—can capture photos 40 percent faster than the iPhone 4S, according to Apple. The iPhone 4S was already pretty fast in our experience, so this is a significant improvement.

Additional signal processing capabilities also allow Apple to employ advanced imaging improvements comparable to those of high-end digital cameras. Spatial noise reduction helps keep noise from the tiny sensor in check, and the camera will now use dynamic pixel-pinning to boost images captured in low light. A new "smart filter" also analyzes images before applying noise reduction, selectively reducing noise in areas of uniform color or tone, while using less noise reduction in areas that should retain texture and detail.

Sample images provided by Apple should show some evidence of this smart filtering. For instance, compare the areas in the skin of this cute snap of a little girl enjoying a sno-cone to those around the eyes, mouth, fingers, and hair. You may notice that areas around edges, or areas of more texture, have more noise than the larger areas of skin such as the cheeks. There's also less noise in the yellow wooden slats behind her, except in areas of texture or around the edges.

The iPhone 5 continues to capture 1080p stabilized video, same as the iPhone 4S.

The hardware for the front-facing camera has also been significantly improved over the first generation "FaceTime" cameras on previous iOS devices. A new "FaceTime HD" camera retains the fixed-focus lens, but now uses a 1.2MP backside-illuminated CMOS sensor. Stills can be captured at 1.2MP, while video is upgraded from SD to 720p HD. The camera can also use face detection to bias exposure for portraits and FaceTime video chats.

iPod touch: finally a worthy contender

The iPod touch got a more serious update to its camera hardware, which was barely useable in its previous incarnation. Our examination of the fourth-generation iPod touch revealed snapping abilities that were just this side of better-than-nothing, and the sub-2MP images captured with a fixed focus lens weren't good for much more than changing Facebook avatars or snapping a pic to quickly illustrate some point. These images were never going to be printed or saved for posterity; by contrast, a 5MP image straight from my iPhone 4 was printed on stretched canvas at 16x20" and now hangs over the mantel.

The iPod touch now includes seriously useful camera hardware.

Nathan Mattise

The good news is that Apple seriously beefed up the iPod touch's camera. It now features a 5MP backside-illuminated CMOS sensor similar to the one used in the iPad 3. It also has a hybrid IR filter and five-element f/2.4 autofocus lens from the iPhone, and now includes an LED "flash." Coupled with an A5 processor, the camera doesn't have the same spatial noise reduction, smart filter, or dynamic low-light capture as the iPhone 5. However, its capture quality should be as good as the iPhone 4S, with resolution comparable to the iPhone 4 or third-gen iPad. That's a pretty good standard—vastly improved over the old iPod touch, and good enough for many to consider ditching a dedicated point-and-shoot digicam.

In addition, the iPod touch now includes the FaceTime HD camera included in the iPhone 5, so self portraits and FaceTime chats will be comparably improved.

Easy panoramas: just follow the arrow

The major new software feature added to iOS 6's Camera app is the touted automatic "Panorama" feature. This feature, compatible with the iPhone 5, new iPod touch, and the iPhone 4S, makes it easy to capture wide, panoramic views of up to 240 degrees and up to 28MP in resolution by simply rotating the camera.

Apple SVP Phil Schiller discussed the new Panorama feature in iOS 6 at a special media event.

Nathan Mattise

Simply hold your iPhone or iPod touch in vertical orientation and sweep it across the view in the direction indicated on the screen. The camera app uses input from the gyroscope to figure out how to align a series of images, even if you don't use a smooth, linear motion. "Behind the scenes, in real time, it's taking slices of photos, finding the edges, stitching them together, creating seamless transitions between photos," Apple SVP of Worldwide Marketing Phil Schiller explained during the iPhone 5's introduction on Wednesday.

So far the demonstrations have been impressive, and we look forward to testing the feature further once iOS 6 and the newer hardware is released.

Miscellaneous software tweaks

The Camera software has also gotten a few other software tweaks. With the iPhone 5's beefier A6 processor, the camera has improved video stabilization and face detection. One feature we think will be quite popular is the ability to take still photos while shooting video; this capability has been migrating from high-end digital cameras to smartphones over the past few months, and it was smart of Apple to add the feature. It's not clear if these stills are full resolution or just 1920x1080 pixel captures, but either way it could come in handy.

We are a little disappointed that Apple doesn't appear to have added any manual overrides to settings like white balance, ISO, exposure compensation, or exposure. It's clear that Apple wants the camera to be super easy to use, and therefore limits its features. But with other advanced options like HDR and a grid overlay, as well as the new panorama feature, we see no reason not to at least make them available as an optional ability that experienced photographers could use.

Overall, though, the iPhone 5 appears to offer significant and useful updates for existing owners of the iPhone 4 or earlier hardware. If you have an iPhone 4S, the refined camera may not be enough on its own to justify an early upgrade. We'll definitely dig into image quality comparisons when we have hardware to review, and should be able to offer a clearer picture—pun intended—of the value to both casual and serious photographers.

Users with older iPod touches who want to take better pictures should definitely be pleased with what Apple is offering with the $299-and-up fifth-gen models. In this case, if picture quality is a large concern for you, I honestly have no qualms about recommending an upgrade, even without having touched the new hardware.

Promoted Comments

I don't really believe the A6 is using Cortex A-15 cores because ARM teamed up with Texas Instruments to be the launch partner of the A-15 SoCs. I'd be highly surprised if Apple is launching a Cortex A-15 based SoC before ARM even believes it's ready.

I've been using Pano, a third-party panorama app, on my iPhone for years. It's neat that it works, but it's really fiddly and you have to overlap your pictures in a particular way and hope it can stitch them together.

Because it's such a pain, I only used it for scenic mountain views and so forth. I'm really looking forward to Apple's implementation, which looks like much less friction.

137 Reader Comments

"Ars Technica is not responsible for the crazy conspiracy theories that you perceive when reading our articles."

Why should every Ars article include a complete history of every single feature they mention when talking about a product's feature set? That would just waste everyone's time and be boring, just to appease a few people who gladly admit they hate the company that is making the product.

When you hate something, you are having an emotional reaction. This shuts down the rational part of your brain. If you hate Apple, you are incapable of reading an article about an Apple product from a clear and rational place. I don't hate Google or Samsung or HTC or whatever, I just don't find any of their products to meet my particular needs as well as an iPhone does. I can see a product review of an iPhone competitor and think "gee, that's neat" or "meh, that's lame", but I don't have an emotional irrational reaction to it that makes me write a bunch of comments complaining that Apple did it first or that the reviewer should mention the complete history of a particular feature set or they are biased towards the company that made the product they're reviewing.

I look at Apple's panorama feature and go "meh, that's lame" because panoramas are for noobs who can't figure out how to frame a picture right so they just take a picture with everything in it. I still think it's interesting to see Apple's approach, and the technical details, but I'm not going to see it as some sort of killer feature that every phone needs to have, or that it's something worth having a "who got there first" argument about. I'm much more interested in the camera itself. Since when was this site a penis measuring contest? I come here for the nitty gritty technical details and investigative articles. I'm a tech guy first, who cares who's made the thing, tell me about the tech and how it works, and I'm happy.

I'm not buying the iPhone 5, or anything else this year. I don't have a horse in this race. I certainly don't feel a need to be defensive about any new phone. Can't we all just get along?

Maybe it's the part where the article carefully explained what it does and how it works, as though it's something brand new that people aren't likely to ever have seen before. I know that part struck me as odd.

Well, does it help if we point out that the majority of new Android phones are still shipping Android 2.x and have never seen the panorama mode? So even to most Android owners - even most NEW Android owners, panorama *is* a new feature.

Panorama modes was/is shipping on gingerbread phones. At least the phones I have. And I know of a friend with a first gen Galaxy Tab (2yr old 7" gingerbread tablet) that has it too. Providing these extra features is part of why a lot of manufacturers don't ship stock Android. People complain about, it but it has pluses and minuses.

I agree its weird the article doesn't mention it, but I think its mostly because I feel certain that, were the roles reversed, it would certainly have "Taking a cue from the iPhone, Android added a Panorama mode to their camera app" tacked to the front. I'm actually curious how the two implementations compare though. Then again, iOS6 still hasn't shipped. Given that iPhone users STILL don't have this feature that's probably tough to do.

Isn't a smaller sensor detrimental? Isn't is the bigger the better? I mean that's why DSLR's take much better pictures compared to Point & Shoots because the bigger sensor allows more light.

Not necessarily, there's a trade off in both directions.

The physically larger sensors do have some advantages, like being able to get that shallower depth of focus, and having larger photosites (comparing similar or even somewhat higher megapixel counts) which do help a lot, especially in low light situations.

However, they are much larger, tend to be way to large to fit into a pocket, and also require more knowledge to get full use out of. Specifically in a phone, for 95+% of shots you'll want it all to be in focus, which means you need a very short hyper-focal length. So a much smaller sensor (with a similarly small lens) will tend to get that for you much better so that the entirety of the image is in focus. Or at least even a small mis-focus won't render everything out of focus, it'll still look fine.

And better can be a very subjective term when you start talking about photography. There have been some really great ones taken with nothing more than an iPhone (it's actually become somewhat of a cult thing), or a cheap P&S or even one of those really cheap disposable film cameras. A lot has to do with knowing how to take a photo, and the features & technology are really only there as an aid, or in cases where you just wouldn't be able to get a shot using other, cheaper tools.

Yeah, I guess I can see it that way now. Thanks for the explanation! =)

Why should every Ars article include a complete history of every single feature they mention when talking about a product's feature set? That would just waste everyone's time and be boring, just to appease a few people who gladly admit they hate the company that is making the product.

Maybe it's the part where the article carefully explained what it does and how it works, as though it's something brand new that people aren't likely to ever have seen before. I know that part struck me as odd.

Well, does it help if we point out that the majority of new Android phones are still shipping Android 2.x and have never seen the panorama mode? So even to most Android owners - even most NEW Android owners, panorama *is* a new feature.

Granted, I might be a special case since I remember using the panorama function on my feature phone circa 2008.

I've been using Pano, a third-party panorama app, on my iPhone for years. It's neat that it works, but it's really fiddly and you have to overlap your pictures in a particular way and hope it can stitch them together.

Because it's such a pain, I only used it for scenic mountain views and so forth. I'm really looking forward to Apple's implementation, which looks like much less friction.

Panorama modes was/is shipping on gingerbread phones. At least the phones I have. And I know of a friend with a first gen Galaxy Tab (2yr old 7" gingerbread tablet) that has it too. Providing these extra features is part of why a lot of manufacturers don't ship stock Android.

I used a panorama app on my iPhone 3G, but it didn't work anything like the iOS 6 implementation. I think the closest is Photosynth or maybe 360. The Galaxy Tab implementation was nothing like this, either.

The comments of this article are so bad that a guy that posted his comment to the wrong article managed to get editor's pick.

That's not fair; I mention the possibility that the A6 may have A15 cores in this post, which published well before Andrew's.

Chris is right, but i think mikebro's comment is hilarious... especially since it's his first post. Apparently the comments bugged him to the point of registering just to say that. And he does have a point about a lot of the comments.

The title reads like a Verge title. Along with sourcinig stories from the Verge, I would almost get the impression that Ars is competing against the Verge.

please don't. You guys are a better publication than they are. They are good for quik bits of new info but aren't terribly good with critical thought. their bias is also very heavy and have carried over directly from their time at Engadget.

this is the ONE site of maybe only 3 I read where I expect (and usually get) opinions but critical opinions and critical thought from the writers. The whole "Nokia lying" and this particular title makes me a little sad considering the actual content is fine.

CMOS has better low light capabilities but the noise levels are way too high if the sensor is small. DSLR have a bigger sensor size hence better image . Panorama ..really is that revolutionary.. overall at most a mid level point n shoot.. what the heck is a photog ? never heard it before .

It shouldn't be a surprise, just look at the latest release of OSX, instead of better refining the OS to suit both power-users and the layman, they just removed most of the more "tinker-friendly" features altogether to cater to the lowest common denominator. Such a denominator is their largest consumer base, so it was a logical choice. But companies with enough skill and internal talent can usually come up with something to satisfy both audiences. They either lack these kinds of high end developers, or they just took the easy way out.

What's especially funny is the marketing. They usually turn this feature-rip-away behaviour upside down with a spin, something along the lines of "The new iPhone. Faster. Better. Simpler." "Simpler" not as in "simpler to use because it's more refined", but "simpler to use because we took out all the features that many people don't use but that more tech-savvy users might like to have".

Please don't pretend that this doesn't happen.

You mean like Microsoft's Windows (because you sure as hell didn't mean Linux)? Sure, I've never once had to act as tech support for any of their systems because even the most tech illiterate family member or friend has managed. And I'm sure glad they're not appealing to "the lowest common denominator" by making a Fisher Price themed touchscreen OS that has had nothing but global nerd ridicule over the last 12 months.

It's okay. I know you said you hated Apple. Just please don't be condescending and incorrect as well.

My hate for Apple, which I'll admit, doesn't make any points I might have to make based on reasons and evidence about their operating systems any less valid. For you to imply that it would means that you don't value reason nor evidence and are willing to throw out any argument just because someone fesses up to having a personal bias.

I'm not saying I hate Apple because of <insert vague unexplained points here>. I'm giving reasons and explanations as to why, and how some of their products fall short.

You hate apple. Fine. I hate windows. You respond all the time. Multiple times to articles because you are trolling your hatred. You go on about OS X? Really? I don't go on about Win*whatever because I don't use it. I don't buy it. You don't buy OS X and yet you prattle on forever about it.

You focus obsessively on your apple hatred. You don't use their products (except your ipod touch 3), won't buy their products and know only what you read in articles, preferably supplied by anybody that will not like apple enabling further hatred and diatribe from you.

You don't use it. Get off the bus. Or buss for that matter. Whatever it takes to mute you.

What I really want to see is an iPhone 5 / Lumia 920 camera-off. Both are ~8MP and claim to have some amazing stuff going on to improve photos, so it would be an interesting duel.

FWIW, my wife has an iPhone 4S, I have a Lumia 900. The iPhone 4s is a superior camera--particularly in low light situations (inside). Having said that, the Lumia is a better smartphone and even my wife is considering switching to a WP for her next phone in a couple years.

Do you mind mentioning what you like better about the Lumia 900?

We were planning on iPhone 4S for my significant other this Xmas, she loves her iPad 2, but she really needs 32 gb and Apple is only making 16 gb 4S now.

She likes the Lumia 920 and as a M$ phone it should work for the few work related things that her iPad 2 doesn't.

Anyways, getting back on topic, serious camera enthusiasts will never do photo shoots with their iPhone, so why bother trying to get to that point? Sure make it nicer for those quick snapshots, but shouldn't you focus your energies in innovation?

You mean like making it easy for amateurs to get great shots for their phone without even giving them access to all the fiddly bits?

Brass2TheMax wrote:

Or Apple just didn't have the skilled enough developers with the talent to pull it off properly before anyone else. That's not necessarily the reason, but it's a possibility, given that neither you or I know the real internal reasons.

You're hilarious, dude. <3

Quote:

… when really I explained that I think I knew what they meant, and only told you how it came across to me.

So… you're pretty sure they didn't mean it that way… yet you decided to take it that way anyway?

Yeah, it might be time to take a break, man.

aaronb1138 wrote:

Also, The Verge has a head to head comparison of the iPhone 4S (and others) camera against the Nokia 920 in low light situations. The iPhone 5 camera is little changed, so the results would be equally valid.

As mentioned a few times in the article, they've improved the low-light capabilities in the 5's camera, so… not so much, no.

Well, it would be, if it wasn't a comparison between a phone that's a year old and one that's not even out yet.

Funny, I was unaware that the Lumia 920 been out for a year since it was just announced. Unless it's somehow September 2013 and I missed a whole year. If so, then I really need to complain to my doctor about adjusting my dosage of Ativan.

Well, it would be, if it wasn't a comparison between a phone that's a year old and one that's not even out yet.

Funny, I was unaware that the Lumia 920 been out for a year since it was just announced. Unless it's somehow September 2013 and I missed a whole year. If so, then I really need to complain to my doctor about adjusting my dosage of Ativan.

It's the iPhone 4S that's been out a year, and the Lumia 920 that doesn't even have an announced ship date (unlike the iPhone 5, which ships next Friday).

The Verge got Nokia's PR people to let it shoot some pics with a prototype Lumia 920 to an iPhone 4S, Galaxy SIII, and one of the new HTCs, I believe, and then published them. It's little proof that the Lumia 920 "kills" the iPhone 5, since neither devices are in anyone's hands yet, and NO ONE will actually be comparing those devices until the Lumia 920 actually ships (and no one outside of Nokia knows when that will be).

I will admit that the Lumia 920 appears to take brighter pictures in low light compared to the iPhone 4S, based on the images Nokia PR supplied to The Verge. That's because the iPhone 4S doesn't offer pixel binning (though I believe it could; not sure if the limit is hardware or software) and it limits long shutter exposure to prevent bluriness. The Lumia will lower the shutter speed for better exposure, but you can definitely see in the sample from The Verge/Nokia PR that there's quite a bit of motion blur from hand holding. I believe the iPhone 5 overcomes this by pixel binning to increase sensitivity and allow a faster shutter speed. But again, I won't be able to verify that until I actually get to use one.

iPhone 5 has some new SW features, but I don't think that will change the results as much as you hope. Also one thing you are missing is that with 920's OIS it's easier to take photos with longer exposures. That way you can eliminate some of the inherited blurriness from taking a long exposure photo handheld.

Anyways I a bit let down by this article. The 5 doesn't seem to a big change in photo quality compared to previous model and mostly just SW enhancements. I also thought that panorama was basic feature already in all the phones, not something newsworthy?

+1, to compare the HW to other models when available (and not just iPhones...).

I'm also bothered by the obsession with thinness. It's nonsense. It's not necessary and it introduces limitations. The iPhone 4S was thin enough. Most people put some kind case over it anyway. I'd rather have some real badass improvements than a thinner phone.

I appreciated the update on camera features in the iPhone 5. I'm thinking of getting an iPhone 5 and the iPhone's reputation of having a decent smartphone camera was part of the attraction of this iPhone.

In the article the improved low light feature would probably be the most important improvement. (A sharper lens, better lens protection and noise reduction are also useful.) I'm looking forward to taking pictures with this.

I've been using Pano, a third-party panorama app, on my iPhone for years. It's neat that it works, but it's really fiddly and you have to overlap your pictures in a particular way and hope it can stitch them together.

Because it's such a pain, I only used it for scenic mountain views and so forth. I'm really looking forward to Apple's implementation, which looks like much less friction.

I have an expensive sony point and shoot which has a nearly perfect panorama mode. 95 percent of the time it works and the rest it will not even let you take the picture. Unless apple licensed sonys implementation I don't know if it will be as good.

Anyway I can't believe they didnt upgrade the camera over the 4s. thats one of the main things i look for in an upgrade to my phone since its the bigegst thing I do with it.

Okay, I know it's been said, but Android has had Panorama for over a year, even longer if you're using an AOSP or custom ROM.

Could you Apple-ites at least go so far as to MENTION that Android had it first?

It was on Symbian more than 3 years ago. My SE Satio had it, worked well too. Take picture, move camera around, it sensed when it was level and took the next one. Once again Apple announce features as if they invented them.

I don't really believe the A6 is using Cortex A-15 cores because ARM teamed up with Texas Instruments to be the launch partner of the A-15 SoCs. I'd be highly surprised if Apple is launching a Cortex A-15 based SoC before ARM even believes it's ready.

The Snapdragon S4 is using cores based on the A-15 so I don't see any reason why Apple won't be.

The first is so trivial to fix in post that you can do it even in free software. Of the latter, I'm pretty sure Apple has offered "touch to make this spot look good" for some time now, which any "serious" photographer should be able to handle to achieve the exposure they want. Or use a SLR with a real lens.

Good that the new iPod Touch gets an okayish camera, though. The 4th-gen unit has an uncanny ability to take smudgy, noise-filled shots that don't even look good on Instagram; in bright sunlight you can get decent highlights but that's about it. It's like shooting with ISO 25 or something.